Constantine Hannaher has posted some very nice shots of this clean 1969 Continental sedan, the last year of the series that began with the brilliant 1961 (full story here). The ’69 is distinctive for its new front end styling, which broke with the traditional Lincoln horizontal grille for one that is opened up in the center section. It’s an odd choice, since the horizontal grille reappears the next year in the all-new 1970 (CC here). This ’69 grille does look rather ’67-’68 Caddillac-like, and Lincoln was doing all it could to make inroads on Caddy’s huge sales lead.

Lincoln sales did edge up in the final years of the suicide-door, helped by the coupe version and price adjustments that essentially eliminated the premium the Continental once commanded. Some 38k Continental sedans and coupes were sold in ’68 and ’69, and ironically, sales dropped painfully lower with the new 1970 replacement. It wouldn’t be until ’74-’75 that the big Lincoln really got its mojo going.

In the words of Agent 86, “Missed it by THIS much.” Meaning that my father picked up a new 1970 Mark III in the fall of 69. I liked the big Lincolns and asked why he hadn’t gotten a Continental. He told me that if they had still been making the suicide door version, he would have done it, but the 1970 Lincoln was new and had lost that feature. I guess Lincoln did the right thing for itself, as the Mark III was a lot more expensive.

I like the ’69 Connie. I remember building a model kit of one as a kid, but neither the kit nor the car was all that common. This color suits it perfectly. The lines on this car have a grace and lightness that got lost with the bulkier-looking 70. What is funny, I think this car outweighed the 70 model. Looked it up: ’69 was 5181 lbs, ’70 was 4910, so a good 250 lbs difference between the heavier 69 and lighter 70.

It’s because the unibody Lincolns (and T-Birds) were engineered at a time when computers couldn’t be utilized to help design a unibody that was optimized. They drastically over-built these unibodies just to be on the safe side.

By the late 60s, if they had chosen to design a new unibody Lincoln, it would have come out lighter too. The old one was a tank.

Bingo, and I’m sure that is why sales dropped in 1970. Not only did the ’70 Continental lose all its design distinctiveness, it ended up looking more like a 1969 Mercury Marquis than anything else. Why would someone want a Lincoln that might get mistaken for last year’s Mercury? It’s supposed to work the other way, i.e. the cheaper car picks up on the styling themes already seen in the more expensive brand.

I think the 1970 model might have been a bigger success, and easier to distinguish from the ’70 Marquis, if it had adopted from the outset the revisions made for 1972: the revised beltline for the 4-door (i.e., different rear doors and windows), and the return of end-to-end fender-edge moldings.

I built a ’69 Continental model kit as well. I also had a 1941 Continental in 1:25 scale (black with tan interior and “convertible” top) that is one of my all time favorites. The ’69 had bucket seats {!} one of which wound up in my Pinewood Derby racer that won at the pack level in 1970. All the ’61-’69 Connies were sharp and stately in appearance. A lady from church had a black 1965 sedan. In my young mind it seemed more elegant than my father’s 1967 Cadillac though I shared his opinion that the Caddy was an overall better car.

If you were to eliminate the newer cars from the background, those pictures would look just like magazine ad shots; like something out of an old copy of Life or Reader’s Digest. That’s the combination of the condition of the car and the quality of your photography. Good job!

My dad bought the coupe version of this car in the autumn of 1968 — charcoal metallic, 460-4V, black vinyl roof, black leather. Worst reliability in the world — everything went wrong with that car, but its sheer beauty made it a bit easier to overlook the flaws. I’ll always remember the cool strip-style speedometer whose band changed from green to amber to red as speed increased, and the hood-ornament paperweight that Lincoln sent as a gift a few weeks later. I have it on my desk today!

I have a 1969 Lincoln brochure which is not in pristine condition because I must have read it hundreds of times when I was 14 years old (my avatar isn’t the Continental star for nothing).

I wonder if this car has the “ultra-luxury” Town Car interior option” which included “unique leather-and-vinyl seats and door panels, special napped-nylon headlining, extra plush carpeting and color-keyed instrument panel trim”. Available in 5 colors. One year only.

It does have the “stainless steel, turbine textured, flared wheel covers” which I think look terrific on this car.

Here’s the rear seat which is the only picture of the Town Car option in the brochure.

The Town Car package continued as an option on the Continentals for 1970 and beyond, it was a response to Cadillacs popular “Brougham” option on the Fleetwood Sixty Special sedans. The Brougham option appeared in 1965-1966 and quickly rose to popularity, it was ordered on something like 80% of Fleetwoods.

The Town Car package included “power vent windows” (not swiveling but a separate section that lowered) starting with the 1973 model year. (Personally I preferred the standard Continental upholstery to the pillow-and-button type used in the 1971-74 Town Cars.)

By 1969 the vent windows of the Continental were quite old-fashioned-looking, with the ’69 Cadillac as competition. In part this was because the Continental’s side glass still used full-perimeter bright metal frames, which other Fords (such as the Mustang and the large hardtops and convertibles) had also used through ’68 but had dropped for ’69 in favor of a more modern look.

I can almost see in the ’70 Continental a more distinctive car that could have been more of a true successor, despite moving to body-on-frame. Some elegance was retained, such as the clean and simple tail treatment, which remained badge-free through 1974 (other than the star logo/trunk lock cover).

I like the earlier ones more, but a nice one of these is still kinda of deal compared to the earlier ones that bring a little more. None of them are that valuable though.

I never understood why it took them so long to offer a coupe body style in this generation Continental, the coupe didn’t show up until 1966, and even stranger, they kept offering it, with minimal sales, into the early 80’s, in spite of the better selling Mark series cars appearing in 1968. I wished Lincoln had continued to offer the suicide doors on the 1970 and up Connies too.

Nope. They are not outlawed. The first gen and the current gen of Rolls-Royce Phantom has the Suicide doors.

Prior to that the last car with true doors like that was the 1971 T-Bird. Variations of the suicide door has been incorporated in the saturn Ion and last gen SC, the Toyota FJ Cruiser, the Honda Element and the Mazda RX-8 and a lot of extended pickup trucks to name a few

True suicide doors got that nickname for two reasons: If you’re getting out and another car hits the door from behind, it will close on your legs or whatever body parts happen to be hanging out. The other reason is that, if you accidentally open the door while the vehicle is in motion, the wind will whip the door all the way open, and possibly pull you out of the vehicle.

The difference with most of the vehicles that you mentioned is that the rear door can only be opened when the front door is already open, so the second reason is immaterial.

Yes, most of the doors you mention are technically “clamshell” doors if they can’t be opened without the front door being opened first.
But now with the demise of the FJ Cruiser et al., and the extended cab pickups all switching over to conventional rear-opening doors, it seems even they may be leaving us soon.

The first manufacturer to make the switch was Dodge in 2002 with the all-new “Quad” Cab 1500, followed the next year by the 25/3500. The all-new 2007 Toyota Tundra dropped its “Access” extended cabs and “Double” crew cabs for a new rear-opening “Double” extended cab and “CrewMax” crew cabs. It wasn’t until the release of the all-new 2014 Chevy Silverado/GMC Sierra twins, with their rear-opening “Double Cab” that it became the majority rather than the minority. Nissan will probably follow suit when its long-overdue 2015 model is released. But Ford has announced that its 2015 F-150 (and presumably the 2016 Super Duty) will keep the front-opening SuperCab for the time being.

The biggest reason for the switch is, like seemingly everything else, safety–ever since the Big 3 started putting doors on their extended cabs and making a large, pillarless, open space in the cab, it’s been harder to get good rollover ratings. Ford has presumably found a way to maintain good ratings without adding a B-pillar.

Personally, I really like the front-opening extended cabs versus rear-opening. It’s a lot easier to get into the back of my one buddy’s ’01 Chevy than my other buddy’s ’03 Dodge.
But it’s another thing entirely to clamber into the back of a ’77 F-250 SuperCab…

Ah the 4th gen Continental. Best Connie ever. it is not like that FWD Taurus derived POS that arrived in 1988 and stuck around till 1994 and while it is big it is not like that Titanic sized 5th gen that followed after(ship ahoy!!!)

I commented once on another thread that the 88 to 94 Continental is sort of a “Lincoln Lesabre” compared to its predecessors. My father nearly bought a pristine one once when a neighbor who couldn’t get in and out of a car that low anymore was selling his. He decided it wasn’t “Lincoln enough” to justify his purchase although he liked the lengthened DeVilles of the early 90s.

Is this 1967 Mercury basically the same car as the Lincoln Continental ?
Sure looks like it. I had (several) thorough looks at this Mercury, I really like it.
Very rare too, never seen another one at the US car shows here.
(Whereas the Lincolns are all over the place, especially the ones from the seventies)

What XR7Matt said, except that the Mercury was on a longer wheelbase. The Ford was a 119 inch wb car, while the Mercury was 121 or 122 (from memory) inches. Otherwise, the Ford Galaxie and the big Mercury shared a body-on-perimeter frame construction. The Lincoln from 1961-69 was unit construction, and its only close relative within the Ford Motor Company was the 1961-66 Thunderbird, which was also unit construction and which was built in the same Wixom, Michigan factory.

Despite my GM leanings, I could not imagine anyone picking a Cadillac Sedan over this gorgeous machine. The proportions are just perfect to me at every angle. The grille is my least favorite of this series but the turbines and 460 make up for that.

My father bought a ’71 Mark III Lincoln when it was about a year old and it too was constantly having issues. Issues as in “call the tow truck” issues. It was still one of the most beautiful cars I can remember though.

1969 sure was an interesting year for domestic automotive design. With the premium luxury brands, you could still get a Kennedy-era, suicide door Continental, an Elvis-era Cadillac with vestigial fins, or the imposing, brand-new, fuselage-body, hidden-headlight Imperial.

I probably would have went with the Chrysler. Yeah, poorer build-quality, but it’s hard to beat the dynamic fuselage look and 440/Torqueflite drivetrain. It was definitely the hustler of the three.

I was thinking about what I would have picked that year had I been shopping these cars. It would have been quite a choice, as I really like all 3. I imagine I would have narrowed it down like this:
1) Lincoln: beautiful and classic, but end of the design era and starting to feel “old.”
2) Imperial: so new and strikingly different styling, but a tad too much like the cheaper New Yorker.
3) Cadillac: the American luxury standard, “ready for the 1970s” restyle, killer resale values. So this probably would have been my pick, but would have been sorely tempted by the Lincoln and Imperial.

Speaking of being tempted, what I really would have wanted in 1969 would have been a Mark III or an Eldorado. Talk about a tough choice!

I would imagine that, in typical fashion, brand allegiance ruled which one of the three were bought by any given consumer.

As mentioned, Chrysler just didn’t have the resources to be able to keep the same level of separation between the Imperial and the regular Chrysler lineup that Ford and GM was able to do with Lincoln and Cadillac. Cadillac was 100% Cadillac, sharing few parts with any other GM product (including engines).

While Lincolns had engines that could be had in other Ford products, at least they had clearly defined, specific body panels unlike anything else in the Ford or Mercury lineup.

By 1969, the Imperial not only had regular Chrysler product engines (the legendary 440) but also shared many body panels. They just weren’t as special and couldn’t justify the extra cost of a Cadillac or Lincoln. It was the beginning of the end for the once proud marque, culminating in the 1975 Imperial, which was, literally, nothing more than a fully loaded New Yorker with hidden headlights and 4-wheel disc brakes.

Ironically, the 1976 New Yorker Brougham sold much better than the previous year’s virtually identical Imperial, only the New Yorker Brougham wasn’t available with rear disc brakes and you had to add all the options the Imperial had as standard.

A gorgeous example of the breed. Like most people, I prefer the earlier ones, but this one looks so good that I have to reconsider. I would probably take it over a ’69 Cadillac.

Wouldn’t it have been something if the coupe version also had suicide doors like today’s Rolls Royce? (I know, it’s bad for rear-seat entry… but if you’re too practical, you end up with the lopsided Pacer!)

Here are a few pictures that I took of a similar Lincoln found in my favourite scrapyard last Winter. It was a complete car, and was probably another failed restoration project. According to the yard owner, the underneath of the car had suffered due to being left on wet grass, so it ended up in the boneyard. Still a beautiful car, even in this state.

Beautiful Lincoln – kudos to the owner for keeping it in such good condition. Of the 66-69 models, I prefer the 66-67 front end – it’s just more distinctive.

I had a 67 coupe with the 462 which is a huge lump of an engine – fairly reliable and lots of torque but it felt like it had an anchor tied to the crankshaft, like other Ford V8s of the period. The 460 was a much better and more responsive engine.

And I wholeheartedly agree that the unibody Lincolns (and T-Birds) were significantly over-built. They have this solid feel to them, unlike similar FOMOCO products.

Curious that several posters cited problems with their new Lincolns, the Wixom plant that built all Lincolns was well known as one of Ford’s better quality plants.

I just now noticed the windshield wipers in these pictures, and was reminded of how this series of Lincoln all used wipers that were backwards for a left-hand-drive car (the passenger gets his glass cleaned nearly to the edge of the pillar, not the driver). The Avanti was the only other American car I can recall with these backwards wipers. Anyone know why Lincoln did this? I cannot imagine that there were a lot of exports to RHD countries.

I know that at least the earlier cars of this series used a hydraulic system or the wipers, so perhaps there was some engineering reason.

Interesting observation. It appears the driver side wiper stretches unusually hard toward the pillar to minimize the non swept area.

Coming from where winter grime can get thick fast, I wonder if this was some engineer’s opinion that it was better to be able to see more to the right around the A pillar, and he assumed that when looking to the left, you’d be more likely to look through the side window. In a long car with a steep windshield where you sit quite a ways back from the windshield, this might actually be a sensible design.

My 61 TBird had electric wipers, not the hydraulic ones that were in early Continentals. It appears that they were run from the power steering pump, and ran up into at least the earlier Mark IIIs. And, as you say, the TBird wipers employed an opposing action, while the Continental’s wiped in parallel.

The only other American car that did this was the Avanti. But on the Avanti, that asymmetrical hood bulge would have had a wiper arm coming out of it, so I at least saw a styling reason for the backwards wiper action. Did Lincoln expect to export a lot of these to RHD countries? Or were they trying to make it look exotic (Continental?)

Someone had to pick this design on purpose, and it had to have been either engineering or styling driven. It was certainly not for production efficiency, for as you mention, the TBird mounted wipers differently (as did every other FoMoCo car). Also, the hydraulic system was applied to the Mark III, which used parallel wipers that were placed normally. I am spending way too much time wondering about this today.

It certainly wasn’t for possible RHD cars, as that would have been a minute number at best.

If you look at the Lincoln’s wipers, the driver’s side blade rests higher than the other one, and it actually hangs off the edge of the glass a bit. The two are not symmetrical. suspect that the amount of unwiped area on the driver’s side is actually quite small, and not at all objectionable.

This is a gorgeous car and the photographs capture it perfectly. While not my favorite of the suicide door Lincolns (I prefer the cleaner grille treatment from other model years), I’d still have it in a heartbeat. This color and the wheels are just perfect for the car. I do have a soft spot for these, as one lived down the street from me. It was light blue, with a black top and black leather inside, and it also had the turbine wheels. The owner let me check it out one time, and I was so impressed with its solidity, even though it was almost 10 years old at that time.